Here is a housing opportunity in rural Vermont for living with very low exposure to EMF/RF. The rooms in this house-share will be available this summer. There may also be other housing options on this property with 2 detached cabins, plus camping/RV possibilities.

We will have two bedrooms for rent as a house share (each bedroom is in the $475 – $550 range, with the possibility for work/trade to reduce rent) opening up this summer on the 2nd floor of our house in rural Marshfield, Vermont (I live in an addition off the 1st floor).

The mountains shield the house from cell towers and there is no smart meter (an analog meter is used). We use a landline phone and ethernet cables for internet access.

Radio frequency levels are zero throughout most of the house, according to our TES 593 meter.

We use a wood stove for heat + propane for backup heat and cooking, so the house is not recommended for those with severe MCS.

There are also 2 small very simple cabins available in mild weather, and, safer for MCSers, space for tent or RV camping (there’s a hose + composting toilet, but no hookups)(please inquire for rates).

A large open field is available for gardening and/or raising small livestock, and there are other ways to generate income here. We are currently raising chickens, rabbits, and goats, and growing vegetables and herbs in the summer.

Biological Diversity at Risk From Wireless Radiation

An international team of conservation scientists and ecologists has listed wireless radiation as one of the top emerging issues that could threaten global biological diversity in coming years.

In its ninth annual “horizon scan” to identify emerging issues affecting biological diversity, the Cambridge Conservation Initiative listed electromagnetic radiation from 5G technology as one of 15 top emerging issues to potentially threaten wildlife. The 15 issues were selected from a list of 117 possible candidates. The Cambridge Conservation Initiative is funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB).

The “2018 Horizon Scan of Emerging Issues for Global Conservation and Biological Diversity” was published in the January 2018 issue of Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol 3, No. 1.

“Our aim is to highlight systematically both risks and opportunities to the conservation of biological diversity that are not widely known by conservation scientists and decision makers,” writes lead author William Sutherland. “Horizon scanning can help reduce the degree for conservation biology to be a crisis discipline.”

The entry for Electromagnetic Radiation in the article is printed in its entirety below:

Potential Effects on Wildlife of Increases in Electromagnetic Radiation

Understanding the potential effects of nonionising radiation on wildlife could become more relevant with the expected adoption of new mobile network technology (5G), which could connect 100 billion devices by 2025. During use, mobile telephones and other smart devices generate radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs), a form of nonionising radiation, which may change biological processes such as neurotransmitter functions, cellular metabolism, and gene and protein expression in certain types of cells, even at low intensities [82]. The notion of risk to human health remains controversial, but there is limited evidence of increased tumour risk in animals [83]. 5G uses the largely untapped bandwidth of the millimetre wave-length, between 30 and 300 GHz on the radio spectrum, which uses smaller base stations than current wireless technology. As a result, wireless antennae may be placed densely throughout neighbourhoods on infrastructure such as lamp posts, utility poles, and buildings. This could expose wildlife to more near-field radiation. Although some studies reported negative associations between electromagnetic field strength (radiofrequencies and microwaves: 1 MHz-3 GHz range) and species, for example the density and abundance of house sparrows ( Passer domesticus ) [84,85], these studies have not yielded clear empirical evidence that the observed effects are due to RF-EMFs. The potential effects of RF-EMFs on most taxonomic groups, including migratory birds, bats, and bees, are largely unknown. The evidence to inform the development of exposure guidelines for 5G technology is limited, raising the possibility of unintended biological consequences [86].

Planned Global WiFi from Space Will Destroy Ozone Layer,Worsen Climate Change, and Threaten Life on Earth

For Immediate Release

Five companies are gearing up to provide high-speed global WiFi coverage from space within the next three to four years. This would be an ecological and public health nightmare, according to a recently-formed international coalition: the Global Union Against Radiation Deployment from Space (GUARDS).

The New York Times (May 14, 1991, p. 4) quoted Aleksandr Dunayev of the Russian Space Agency saying “About 300 launches of the space shuttle each year would be a catastrophe and the ozone layer would be completely destroyed.”

At that time, the world averaged only 12 rocket launches per year. Maintaining a fleet of (ultimately) 4,000 satellites, each with an expected lifespan of five years, will likely involve enough yearly rocket launches to be an environmental catastrophe.

GUARDS’ second area of concern is WiFi itself. Although widely perceived as an unqualified good, WiFi operates using extremely rapid pulses of microwave radiation—the same radiation used in microwave ovens. And a parade of studies continue to be published and ignored implicating wireless technology in the die-off of forests, the demise of frogs, bats, and honey bees, the threatened extinction of the house sparrow, and damage to the DNA of the human species. It is vital to the continuation of life that large parts of the earth be spared from the incessant radiation that accompanies wireless technologies.

“The human body”, says Dr Gerard J. Hyland, of the University of Warwick, UK, “is an electrochemical instrument of exquisite sensitivity”, noting that, like a radio, it can be interfered with by incoming radiation. If a signal can operate a mechanical device, it can disturb every cell in the human body.

On February 7, 2014, the U.S. Department of Interior stated that “the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today” in reference to guidelines governing WiFi radiation frequencies.

In 2011 the World Health Organization classified radiation emitted by cell phones, and other wireless commercial infrastructure such as WiFi and smart meters as a Class 2B possible human carcinogen, along with lead, engine exhaust, and DDT. Yet, the global WiFi projects would make this exposure ubiquitous and inescapable.

A recent letter sent by 88 organizations, representing over a million people, to the European Economic and Social Committee outlines how governments are betraying the public trust by ignoring the hazards of radio frequency/microwave (RF/MW) radiation.

Studies show wireless radiation can adversely affect fetal brain development, in addition to causing double-stranded DNA breaks and causing a wide spectrum of illnesses. Continuing and expanding involuntary exposure of the public to this known toxin violates the Nuremberg Code of Human Rights for non-consensual experimentation.

# # #

GUARDS is an international coalition of diverse groups that have joined together in order to stop the implementation of global WiFi from space, which threatens all life on earth.

Resources

Human Health

The 1500-page BioInitiative Report on RF/MW health effects was published in 2012. The authors are 29 scientists from ten countries. They reviewed thousands of studies showing interference with chemical processes in the body, implicating RF/MW in a whole spectrum of alarming effects including genetic damage, cancer, immune dysfunction, neurological injury, and infertility. The report can be found at <www.bioinitiative.org>.

Department of Interior: “the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.” (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf)

September 28, 2014 Update: In the one week since I posted this story, Bruce has been flooded with emails. He is working his way through all emails, and he is responding to everyone by email or phone. He is also trying to defend his cottage from being bulldozed by the government, as described in the article below. So if you have not received a reply, please be patient. He does plan to reply to everyone.

Bruce Evans is man on a mission. And he is looking for other people with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity to join him in creating an EHS refuge in southeast Australia, on land outside of Wangaratta, Victoria in the King Valley.

The land is available for occupancy right now for anyone who can come with a van, tent or caravan. Those who arrive first may be able to have one of the bedrooms in Bruce’s cottage.

People who want to visit the land for a temporary “holiday” from wireless radiation are welcome. But Bruce is also looking for electrosensitive people who want to stay long-term, build their own cottages on his family’s land, participate in the farm and help create a community safe from electropollution.

There is an urgency to Bruce’s mission. The land his cottage is on is government land. It has been used by his family for more than 150 years, and it adjoins a vast tract of land that his family owns outright. The government is now threatening to seize the small portion of government land and demolish Bruce’s cottage, despite an existing contract that would (in theory) prevent such action. The showdown with the government could happen next month, in early October 2014.

Bruce Evans, a 49-year-old web designer with EHS, wants people to come join him on his rural farm in southeast Australia to create an EHS Refuge.

“I want to bring lots of people with the same condition as me to this property and declare it a sanctuary for EHS sufferers,” says Bruce. “I want this area declared as a sanctuary where the telcos cannot infringe, where we can be left alone and not be irradiated.”

The nearest town is 30 kilometres away, and according to Bruce the radiation is minimal at one end of the town. “You can sit in the street and have a coffee, no problem,” says Bruce. “There is also an abundance of wineries and cheese factories with free tasting on the other side of the mountain. There are very picturesque valleys and farms everywhere here.”

Bruce is 49 years old and works as a web designer. It is a profession he has been able to relocate to his rural cottage in King Valley, since the work is largely done online. He says other electrosensitive people with similar web-based businesses could do likewise on this property.

Life in city “unbearable”

“I have severe EHS and cannot live in the city, as it is unbearable,” he says. “I am a prisoner in my own home there and cannot go outside for longer than half an hour. And even then, I have to run like a rat in a maze to avoid the phone tower locations. I was lucky that my father had this cottage in the hills that has no, or extremely limited, phone coverage. I can live here without any problems from phone towers.”

A herd of goats from the goat farm across the road is fond of grazing in Bruce’s yard.

Bruce says he would be devastated if the government bulldozes the cottage that has become his own safe haven, and one that could shelter a few other EHS people as well. However, it won’t be the end of his sanctuary plans, since his family owns a much larger block of land two kilometres away.

“We have vast tracts of land that are completely owned by us and cannot be taken away,” says Bruce “It is a beautiful countryside with plenty of trees and much scope for secluded living. My father is willing to let people come here and build their own cottages, grow their own food and put in a little bit of farm work to earn their keep. There is some work in the surrounding districts with various farms and vineyards. There may be some work for people who have website or IT experience,” he adds.

In addition to the family farm on the property, Bruce is interested in developing communal facilities for the EHS refuge such as a communal kitchen, internet hub and gym suitable for yoga, martial arts and more. People with internet-based businesses could run their business from the property. Healing businesses such as meditation, yoga or massage would also be quite feasible and welcome.

“We need people here now, today, this week,” says Bruce. “Even if you can only come for a couple of days or a week to have a look around. This is very beautiful country, and I aim to keep it radiation free.”

King Valley is located midway between Moyhu and Whitfield. See map below, or download map here: Map of Wangaratta Area.

This just in from Sharon Noble of the British Columbia organization Coalition To Stop Smart Meters. It pertains to a human rights complaint filed in 2012 by Citizens for Safe Technology against BC Hydro, on behalf of electrosensitive people. The BC Human Right Tribunal dismissed the complaint yesterday, September 18, 2014.

“Sad news. Our Human Rights case was dismissed by the Human Rights Tribunal. This was a class action on behalf of people with EHS and whose doctors said that they should avoid RF and not have $$meters. Even though EHS is a recognized by the Human Rights Commission in Canada, the Americans with Disabilities in the US, and as a disability in other countries, the Tribunal chose not to accept evidence but rather to base its decision in large part on the evidence the BCUC accepted in the Fortis application.

“Fortis BC paid a company (Exponent) to defend the $meter. Exponent is a “product defense company” and has defended some of the most dangerous products in the world – pesticides, Agent Orange, asbestos, etc and now microwave radiation. They buy scientists who will produce reports saying anything is safe. One of their people said that our bodies emit more radiation that does a smart meter and the BCUC accepted that while rejecting testimony from world-renowned experts like Dr. Martin Blank, Dr. Isaac Jamieson and Dr. Meg Sears.

“It’s a sad day when the government is allowed, by the Human Rights Tribunal, to come between a patient and his physician, but this is what has happened. Here is the decision for you to read. This makes it more urgent for us to fight this re: fires, fee discrimination, and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

The other class action lawsuit against BC Hydro over smart meters is still ongoing. That one represents all customers of BC Hydro (residential and business) who are unhappy about any aspect of the smart meter program (i.e., getting one if you didn’t want it, getting one and later deciding you don’t want it, being harassed and bullied for refusing to get one), whether or not you currently have a smart meter.

In 1994, the US Air Force published a 32-page report titled: “Radiofrequency/Microwave Radiation Biological Effects and Safety Standards: A Review,” authored by Scott M. Bolen. The supervising agency was Rome Laboratory at Griffiss Air Force Base in New York.

To this day, many if not most governmental agencies and scientists in North America and abroad maintain the position that RF and microwave radiation are only damaging to the human body at power densities high enough to cause a heating effect (a so-called “thermal effect”), like a microwave oven. The position, while completely unsupported by fact, is very convenient for the multi-billion-dollar telecommunications industry (cell phones, WiFi) as well as the military’s own use of these same technologies—technologies whose radiation is, for the most part nonthermal, in nature.

In fact, the serious bio-toxic consequences of nonthermal RF and microwave radiation have been know for decades by our governments and the military. This 1994 USAF report states on page 2, under the heading of Biological Effects:

“Nonthermal responses can be less noticeable and are often more difficult to explain than thermal effects. These responses are related to the disturbances in the tissue not caused by heating. Electromagnetic fields can interact with the bioelectric functions of the irradiated human tissue. Research conducted in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe suggests that the human body may be more sensitive to the nonthermal effects of RF/MW radiation.”

And from page 18 of the report:

“Nonthermal disruptions have been observed to occur at power densities that are much lower than are necessary to induce thermal effects. Soviet researchers have attributed alterations in the central nervous system and the cardiovascular system to the nonthermal effect of low level RF/MW radiation exposure.”

And from the report’s Conclusion, also on page 18:

“Experimental evidence has shown that exposure to low intensity radiation can have a profound effect on biological processes. The nonthermal effects of RF/MW radiation exposure are becoming important measures of biological interaction with EM fields… Adherence to the ANSI Standard should provide protection against harmful thermal effects and help to minimize the interaction of EM fields with the biological processes of the human body.”

In other words, this USAF report from 1994 all but states that the ANSI (American National Standards Institute) Standard of the day was insufficient for protecting the public from the nonthermal effects of RF/MW radiation.

At the time this report was written, that Standard for exposure was set at 50,000 mW/m2 (5 mW/cm2 ) for for frequencies between 1,500 MHz to 100,000 MHz. Today, the maximum exposure limit set by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) for RF radiation in the 850-2400 MHz range (smart meters and other wireless devices) is 10,000 mW/m2. However, that level is more than one million times higher than the exposure limits set out in the 2012 BioInitiative Report. The BioInitiative Report caps exposure to RF radiation at 0.006 mW/m2 .

The point being: the “safe” levels for RF/MW exposure that are laid out in this 1994 USAF report, as well as in current “safe” levels stipulated by North American governments (such as Canada’s Safety Code 6 and the FCC in the US) only address thermal effects of RF/MW radiation and have no bearing whatsoever on the far more serious nonthermal effects that unequivocally exist. The public is simply not being protected.

In March 1976, the US Defense Intelligence Agency published an astounding report titled “Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (Radiowaves and Microwaves) – Eurasian Communist Countries.” The 34-page report analyzes numerous Soviet and Eastern bloc research studies that demonstrate a wide range of adverse biological effects caused by exposure to radio frequency radiation and microwaves. In its Summary on page vii, the report states:

“If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions.”

The above statement and the entire report quite clearly reveal what the government knew and when it knew it. This also reveals WHY Western governments have subsequently been unwilling to acknowledge the bio-toxic effects of wireless systems or the legitimacy of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS), and why “safe limits” of exposure have been raised in subsequent years when, in fact, they need to be lowered.

Post navigation

Follow Refugium by Email

Enter you email address to receive new Refugium posts by email

Join 371 other followers

re·fu·gi·um—An area that has escaped changes occurring elsewhere, thereby providing suitable habitat in which organisms can survive through a period of unfavorable conditions. [from Latin refugium, from refugere to flee away, from re- + fugere to escape]

Kim Goldberg is an award-winning writer in Nanaimo, British Columbia. She is the author of six books and more than 2,000 articles. Kim holds a degree in Biology from University of Oregon and is an avid birdwatcher and nature lover. Read more about Kim here. Email: goldberg@ncf.ca